Russia's got a nationwide anti-ballistic missile (ABM) system even
though the ABM Treaty of 1972 bans ABMs.The Pentagon's codeword for
Russia's ABM system is"Red Shield." In anarticle by William T. Lee,a
retired intelligence analyst who specialized in the Soviet military, he
writes that,
       "A U.S. strike of 1,200 to 1,300  missile      warheads is the
kind of attack  Russia's ballistic missile defenses probably could
handle." ("Russia as the World's No. 1 Nuclear Power," Washington
Times,1/30/96).He's estimating that Russia's ABM system can shoot down
1,300 American warheads.
    This means Russia can prevent America from retaliating effectively
after a Russian nuclear attack. For we'll be sending  only 1,200 to
1,300 warheads over to Russia. According to William Lee's article,
"1,200 to 1,300 warheads"  are the "maximum" number of warheads we would
still have after a Russian first strike.Isn't it obvious that if we can
send to Russia X number of warheads and Russia can shoot down X number
of warheads,then our retaliatory strike is equivalent to zero warheads.
    To be blunt,we have lost our nuclear Deterrent. Russia will no
longer be deterred by  our threat to retaliate, for that threat has 
become hollow.We can't deliver on our threat.         At present, we
have around 6,000 warheads on our missiles.So most people can't see that
in reality we're actually down to just 1,300 warheads.But you can't
judge our arsenal by its size in peacetime.Rather the question to ask
is,what size will it be once war has begun?
    Stop and think about this: (1)Our ICBMs are worthless because
missile warheads from Russian subs can reach them in just 6 minutes -
before we can get them out of their underground silos.("Will Canadian
Waters Become the Next Maginot Line?" Wall Street Journal, 2/2l/86). So
we need to discount the roughly 1,500 warheads on our ICBMs as a valid
Deterrent force.Russia's generals aren't afraid of them for they know
our ICBMs are vulnerable to a Russian first strike.
    (2)Our bombers are worthless for they're been taken off alert.Pres
Bush took our roughly 100 B 52s off alert in 1991.Then Pres Clinton took
our 94 B1 bombers off alert.That leaves only our 20 B2 stealth
bombers.Ten of them are on alert, it's true.But think of it: out of more
than 200 bombers only ten are on alert!!! That's less than 5 percent!
Truly our leaders are "out to lunch"when it comes to national defense!
    Should we expect Russia to be deterred on the basis that we will
unleash ten B 2s if Russia were to attack? No.First of all, the pay-load
of the Air-Launched Cruise Missiles (ALCMs)  on our B 2s is quite
small.Its much less than one mega-ton (probably 150 kilotons of TNT).It
will be used against "hardened" targets such as ICBM silos protected by
several feet of concrete.This means that more than one ALCM may be
needed per target.
    Second,our ALCMs are targeted on military bases not Russian
cities,if I'm not mistaken. Suppose an American ALCM is aimed at a
Russian ICBM silo.A cruise missile, by definition, is relatively
slow.This means that by the time it reaches its target,  the  Russian
missile most likely will already have been launched.
    Third,Russia has over 10,000 batteries of surface-to-air missiles
(SAMs).Each battery contains at least 3 missiles.(Some contain 5
missiles.Others contain l0 missiles.)So we're talking about  ten
American B 2 bombers running a gantlet of at least 30,000 SAMs.
   Fourth,according to Dr Robert Jastrow,the Russian Foxhound fighter
jet has the capability of intercepting the ALCMs launched from our
Stealth bombers. ("Why We Still Need Star Wars," Readers Digest, 2/86).
     In short,our bombers are worthless as a Deterrent force.Since our
ICBMs and bombers are worthless,we're dependent solely on the last "leg"
of our strategic Triad  -  our missile-launching submarines.Fortunately
they are still a valid Deterrent.
    But only half of them are at sea at any time.This means that the
nuclear Deterrent
aboard our subs is only half the size that  it appears to be.For the
subs that are in port don't count as part of our  Deterrent for they
will be destroyed in the event of Russian attack. For our ports will be
easy targets. 
    Only our subs at sea can be expected to escape destruction - for
Russia doesn't know where they are.We have l8 SSBN subs at present.This
means our Deterrent boils down to just the missiles on 9 subs.Each sub
has 24 missiles with 8 warheads each,for a total of 1,728 warheads.So
our Deterrent equals 1,728 warheads,right? Wrong!
    Russia's ABM system can shoot down 1,300 warheads,remember,So we
subtract that many from our 1,728 which leaves us with a total of just
428 warheads.That's the true size of our Deterrent.That's skimpy enough
but now Clinton wants to cut back on our sub-launched ballistic
missiles(SLBMs)! They are the only 
part of our retaliatory arsenal that is worth anything and he wants to
cut back on them - how stupid! Instead of cutting back on our ICBMs to
comply with the arms required by the START II Treaty, Clinton's bright
idea has been to retain several more ICBMs while giving up four of our
boomer subs.(His reasoning is that ICBMs are cheaper to maintain than
SSBN subs.)("Pentagon Wants Unilateral Nuclear Cut?" Richmond
Tmes-Dispatch ll/23/98).
    When we get down to just 14 boomer subs later on this year, in
reality our Deterrent will consist of just the warheads on the 7 subs
we'll have at sea.The warheads on 7 subs add up to just 1,344.
    Now recall that intelligence analyst William Lee estimated back in
January of l996 that Russia's "missile defenses" ie,her ABM system,
could shoot down "1,200 to 1,300 missile warheads." If we take into
consideration that almost 5 years have passed, we can assume Russia's
ABM capability has increased.If the Russians can now shoot down 1,400 to
1,500 warheads and we will soon  have only 1,344 warheads to threaten
them with, our threat of retaliation won't deter them.In order for our
Deterrent to be valid we have to have more warheads than Russia can
shoot down.That will no longer be the case as soon as Clinton cuts back
to just l4 boomer subs.
    We're at the end of an age.The time is short.As the sun sets in the
West,the sky reddens like a pool filling with blood.
    I hope you can see that our Deterrent would be sufficient were it
not for Russia's ABM system.It is the decisive factor.
    For confirmation that Russia has built a nationwide ABM system
(completely violating the ABM treaty), see the following:
(l)Aviation Week & Space Technology 
("Soviets Making Gains in Air Defenses" 4/2/84);
(2)Readers Digest ("Dangerous Myths About Nuclear Arms," ll/82;
"Reducing the Risk of Nuclear War," ll/84;"Russia's Secret 'Red
Shield'," 7/86);
(3)Wall Street Journal,"(editorial)"Breakout" 2/25/88);
(4)American Legion Magazine,"How We Lost Our Nuclear Deterrent," 5/88).